Its very well documented . The US State Department did not make this declaration, nor did the US Military. If you are happy with lies, I;m not surprised, just like you believe what you want to believe about Assange, and everything else you think you re right on. Again you are wrong, you just will not admit it.

You are also full of boloney spouting off what the USA has planned for Assange, their is not plan at this time to extradite him, no arrest warrent as of this time.

The declaration of Assange being an Enemy of the State, did not come from the government, or any part of the US government. The declaration came from Michael Ratner, who is Bradly Mannings lawyer, projecting this from a Air Force investigation of a person in the Airforce who was a Assange sympatizer. Ratner made this declaration to inflame the public using tactics that are totally untrue, and people like you believe it came from the US State Department or the US miltary. Neither made this statement, it all came from Mannings attorney, now people like you take it as Gospel, and believe it completly. It is not true.

greeney2 wrote:Its very well documented . The US State Department did not make this declaration, nor did the US Military. The declaration of Assange being an Enemy of the State, did not come from the government, or any part of the US government. The declaration came from Michael Ratner, who is Bradly Mannings lawyer,

Why do you feel the need to keep lying about this.

Micheal Ratner has nothing to do with this.

It came from a leaked e-mail from Fred Burton. Stratfor’s Vice-President for Counterterrorism and Corporate Security, he is a former Deputy Chief of the Department of State’s (DoS) counterterrorism division for the Diplomatic Security Service (DSS).

Emails cracked from US intelligence consultants Stratfor by Anonymous and published by WikiLeaks have confirmed what was long suspected: that the US government has a grand jury indictment for Julian Assange ready and waiting.

“We have a sealed indictment on Assange,” Stratfor vice-president Fred Burton, a former senior State Department official, told colleagues in January 2011.

But they also again demonstrate the fury, loathing and “obsession”, as one Stratfor analyst put it, that WikiLeaks has generated in the private intelligence industry.

The insight into Stratfor gained from the emails shows that a flimsy intelligence-gathering model can be the basis for generating significant revenue, as long as clients don’t suspect just how poor the information they are getting is. As revealed in its emails, like many consulting firms, Stratfor — bizarrely described by some journalists as a “shadow CIA” — relies heavily on the government contacts of former bureaucrats and pulling together publicly available information and putting a gloss on it.

Fred Burton, for example, as a former Diplomatic Security Service chief in the State Department, is plainly plugged into information networks within his old department, or at least routinely boasts as much. But much of Stratfor’s operation is amateur-hour stuff, as Pratap Chatterjee showed in The Guardian — Stratfor analysts used Google Translate to read Arabic news articles and recycled blog posts for sale to clients.

The comparison has already been made to another victim of Anonymous cracking, Aaron Barr of cybersecurity firm HB Gary Federal, who tried to use publicly available social media datan to sell the FBI a list of key Anonymous members.

It also calls to mind the grandly named National Open Source Intelligence Centre, the mum-and-dad Melbourne company that makes a motza from the AFP and ASIO by collecting publicly available information online that those agencies — despite an extraordinary expansion of their budgets and staffing over the past decade, are unable or unwilling to find on the internet themselves.

That’s not to say Strafor doesn’t have delusions of grandeur. CEO George Friedman is plainly in spy movie mode when he orders a young female senior analyst, Reva Bhalla, to take “financial, s-xual or psychological control” of a source.

What emerges most strongly from the Strafor emails, however, is the sheer froth-mouthed fury that WikiLeaks and Julian Assange elicits from the intelligence industry. “Assange is going to make a nice bride in prison. Screw the terrorist. He’ll be eating cat food forever, unless George Soros hires him,” Burton tells colleagues. He wants Assange “water boarded until he gives us the code” to the WikiLeaks “insurance file”.

And then there’s this revealing email from Burton to Friedman.

“We probably asked the ASIS [Australian Secret Intelligence Service] to monitor Wiki coms and email, after the soldier from Potomac [Bradley Manning] was nabbed. So, it’s reasonable to assume we probably already know who has done it. The delay could be figuring out how to declassify and use the Aussie intel on Wiki… The owner is a peacenik. He needs his head dunked in a full toilet bowl at Gitmo.”

Why the fury? At one stage in the “cat food” email exchange, which begins when someone using the WikiLeaks internet address as cover starts a denial-of-service attack on Stratfor, Bhalla tells her colleagues “we sound just as obsessed as the rest of the media over this thing. Let’s focus on real issue.”

What’s never said is that WikiLeaks is in fact a competitor to Stratfor, but one that refuses to play by the industry’s rules. Stratfor, like so many firms offering consulting and “strategic advisory” services, and not just in the intelligence or cyber security or foreign policy sectors, has a business model based not so much on offering real intelligence and high-quality analysis, as collating publicly available material, dressing it up with “strategic analysis” and preserving a mystique of secrecy around “intelligence” that impresses clients.

WikiLeaks’ diplomatic cable dump smashed that model, revealing a vast trove of information normally controlled by governments and privileges contacts in industry and the mainstream media, and demonstrating that the supposedly arcane and complex world of diplomacy was in fact a mundane world of bureaucratic empire-building, gossip and corporate influence-peddling.

It’s this “Wizard of Oz” moment that has enraged so many who make their living from exploiting the myths around intelligence and foreign policy analysis. The best local example of this is the Lowy Institute’s chief US apologist Michael Fullilove — allegedly mooted as a replacement for Mark Arbib — who incessantly criticised WikiLeaks’ cable release and continued to insist it was dangerous and irresponsible long after even Obama administration officials had admitted only embarrassment had resulted from the leaks.

The fury of people whose business model has been disrupted by WikiLeaks is one thing. The grim reality is that the US government is every bit as determined to destroy WikiLeaks, and it has given itself the legal means to effect the grubby threats of Fred Burton.

In early 2011, Burton revealed in internal Stratfor correspondence that a secret Grand Jury had already issued a sealed indictment for Assange: "Not for Pub — We have a sealed indictment on Assange. Pls protect."According to Burton: "Assange is going to make a nice bride in prison. Screw the terrorist. He’ll be eating cat food forever." A few weeks earlier, following Julian Assange’s release from a London jail, where he had been remanded as a result of a Swedish prosecutor’s arrest warrant,Fred Burton told SkyNews: "extradition [to the US is] more and more likely".

Emails from Fred Burton reveal that the US Government employs the same counterterrorism strategy against Julian Assange and WikiLeaks as against Al Qaeda: "Take down the money. Go after his infrastructure. The tools we are using to nail and de-construct Wiki are the same tools used to dismantle and track aQ [Al Qaeda]. Thank Cheney & 43 [former US President George W. Bush]. Big Brother owns his liberal terrorist arse." (1067796)

Ten days after the CIA reportedly assassinated Osama bin Laden, Burton writes in an email sent to Stratfor’s "Secure" mailing list that he "can get access to the materials seized from the OBL [Osama bin Laden] safe house."

Burton states: "Ferreting out [Julian Assange’s] confederates is also key. Find out what other disgruntled rogues inside the tent or outside [sic]. Pile on. Move him from country to country to face various charges for the next 25 years. But, seize everything he and his family own, to include every person linked to Wiki."

Along with the FBI, the Diplomatic Security Service and the Department of Defense (DoD) form a multi-agency US Government outfit seeking to criminally indict and prosecute WikiLeaks and Julian Assange. According to the Department of State, the DSS handles the investigation of all leads that involve the DoS and assists the DoD in forensic analysis of hard drives seized by the US Government in its ongoing criminal investigation.

Burton also says he "would pursue [c]onspiracy and [p]olitical [t]errorism charges and declassify the death of a source someone which [he] could link to Wiki" (1074383). Burton’s strategy is to: "ankrupt the arsehole first," Burton states, "ruin his life. Give him 7-12 yrs for conspiracy."

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange said: "For over a year now, the US Attorney General Eric Holder has been conducting a "secret" Grand Jury investigation into WikiLeaks. This neo-McCarthyist witch hunt against WikiLeaks may be Mr Holder’s defining legacy. Any student of American history knows that secret justice is no justice at all. Justice must be seen to be done. Legitimate authority arises out of the informed consent of the governed, not Eric Holder’s press secretary. Secret Grand Juries with secret indictments are apparently Eric Holder’s preferred method of dealing with publishers who hold his administration to account. Eric Holder has betrayed the legacy of Madison and Jefferson. He should drop the case or resign. Should he continue, however, the Obama administration may not — Democrats and Republicans alike believe in the right to tell the truth."

As early as June 2010, after the release of the Collateral Murder video but prior to the Afghan War Diaries release, the emails talk of a sealed indictment. In an email conversation between Shane Harris, a National Security journalist, and Burton, Harris is surprised that Assange was reporteded to be attending a Las Vegas Investigative Reporters and Editors (IRE) conference. Burton remarks: "As a foreign national, we could revoke [Julian Assange’s] travel status and deport. Could also be taken into custody as a material witness. We COULD have a sealed indictment and lock him up. Depends upon how far along the military case is" (391504). Julian Assange cancelled his appearance at the IRE conference due to security concerns.

In July 2010 alleged WikiLeaks source Bradley Manning was moved from Camp Arifjan, Kuwait to the Quantico Brig in the Military District of Washington at the request of Maj. Gen. Terry Wolff, then Commanding General of the 1st Armored Division/US Division – Center in Iraq.

Wolff requested Manning’s move, the Pentagon reported, "due to a potentially lengthy pre-trial confinement because of the complexity of the charges and an ongoing investigation.” Three days before Manning arrived at Quantico Brig, Burton wrote to George Friedman, Stratfor CEO and founder:

“We probably asked the ASIS [Australian Secret Intelligence Service] to monitor Wiki coms and email, after the soldier from Potomac was nabbed. So, it’s reasonable to assume we probably already know who has done it. The delay could be figuring out how to declassify and use the Aussie intel on Wiki... The owner [Julian Assange] is a peacenik. He needs his head dunked in a full toilet bowl at Gitmo.

The photo that could clear Assange? Grinning for the camera, WikiLeaks boss and 'Woman A' who says he sexually assaulted her 48 hours earlier

It seems an unremarkable image: a group of friends smiling broadly. But this is the photograph Julian Assange hopes will clear his name.

The face of the woman on the left has been obscured for legal reasons.

For although she is seen beaming, she would later tell police that 48 hours before the picture was taken, the WikiLeaks founder pinned her down in her flat and sexually assaulted her.

If the case ever reaches court - Mr Assange is currently holed up in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London - his lawyers will argue that the photograph undermines the 33-year-old woman's entire story. And, they claim, there is more.In the two days after the alleged assault in Sweden, Mr Assange and Woman A, as she is known, attended a conference and two dinner parties where it is claimed they were practically inseparable.During one party, Woman A tweeted that she was ‘with t

The photograph was taken on August 15, 2010, at the Glenfiddich restaurant in Stockholm, at a dinner of meatballs and schnapps hosted by Rickard Falkvinge, the founder of the Swedish Pirate Party (PP), which campaigns for greater government transparency.

Although by all accounts it was a jolly occasion, there was some serious discussion that at times became ‘passionate and intense’.

Last week's balcony speech was Julian Assange first public appearance since he entered the Ecuadorean EmbassyMr Falkvinge said the purpose of the dinner, which lasted three hours, was to sign a contract between the PP and WikiLeaks so Mr Assange’s organisation could use the party’s computer servers.

Also present was the deputy leader of PP, Anna Troberg, and the party’s IT manager, Rickard Olsson, who brought along his then fiancee, Sara Sandberg.

Since the assault charges were brought, Mr Falkvinge and Ms Troberg have given detailed statements to the police in support of Mr Assange. Mr Falkvinge said their testimony included observations about the body language between Mr Assange and Woman A, who arrived with another woman, called Pietra, who stayed just for the starter.

Mr Falkvinge sat next to Mr Assange, with Woman A sitting diagonally opposite them.‘Most of the night, Julian was speaking with me,’ Mr Falkvinge said. ‘This was a heads of organisation meeting and everybody had a counterpart to talk to. It was a professional dinner.’

More...Arrest Assange 'under all circumstances': Police gaffe as top-secret document reveals how WikiLeaks founder will be dealt with if he tries to leave embassyJulian Assange in new move to flee Britain for EcuadorEcuador president says UK has no right to lecture over Assange after its failure to extradite Pinochet a decade ago

For Mr Falkvinge, one of the things that was striking about it, in view of what he later learned, was that Woman A volunteered to become Mr Assange’s press secretary during the meal. Mr Falkvinge has refused to go into details about the way Woman A behaved with Mr Assange, because he has to give evidence in court if a trial is held.But he made it clear that he did not think Woman A behaved like a victim or someone who had suffered a traumatic sexual experience only two days earlier.

He said: ‘You can look at objective facts and draw far-reaching conclusions: the fact that we are at the dinner and it was with very passionate people and with good food and drinks; the fact that I and Anna Troberg have left depositions as key defence witnesses in the upcoming trial – that does tell you a lot.

‘You can say what we saw was more consistent with the defence than the prosecution.’Due to Woman A’s complaint to the police, as well as that of another alleged victim, Mr Assange has been fighting extradition to Sweden from Britain for the past two years.

He insists he has been set up, and fears that going to Sweden is a ruse for him to be quickly extradited to America, where he could stand trial for leaking hundreds of thousands of classified US military documents on the WikiLeaks website.

His two-year fight against extradition took a bizarre twist when Mr Assange entered the Ecuadorian Embassy in June seeking asylum.

He was granted asylum by Ecuadorian president Rafael Correa last week, igniting a diplomatic rift between Ecuador and Britain.

The Mail on Sunday has also learned that just hours after the alleged attack, Woman A accompanied Mr Assange to a Social Democratic Party conference.

According to police reports, it was there that Mr Assange met Woman B, aged 29, who would accuse him of rape.The two women’s lawyer, Claes Borsgtrom, said yesterday: ‘We will only discuss the dinner at the restaurant and the picture in court.’

Why thats just amazing, he could get cleared. Is it just me of does anyone else find it odd that legally Assange didn't care that 90,000+ secret documents were printed that gave names of informants or clues to them, and revieled secret plans. He said I do not care, and released them anyway! And in the same breathe because he is worried about the legal reasons, blurs out the face of who will clear him?

He has defied the entire world, threw Bradley Manning under the bus, defied the highest court in the UK, seeking assylm, why would be so concerned about one face? It makes no sence.

On the bright side for Assange, Lady Gaga dressed up in a Witch costrume, visited Assange in the embassy, spending several hours alone with him. Assange was said to have dresssed up like Dorthy, and they played "the wizzard of Oz". He was babbling " Oh Toto, there is no place like him".

greeney2 wrote:On the bright side for Assange, Lady Gaga dressed up in a Witch costrume, visited Assange in the embassy, spending several hours alone with him. Assange was said to have dresssed up like Dorthy, and they played "the wizzard of Oz". He was babbling " Oh Toto, there is no place like him".

greeney2 wrote:Why thats just amazing, he could get cleared. Is it just me of does anyone else find it odd that legally Assange didn't care that 90,000+ secret documents were printed that gave names of informants or clues to them, and revieled secret plans. He said I do not care, and released them anyway! And in the same breathe because he is worried about the legal reasons, blurs out the face of who will clear him?

He has defied the entire world, threw Bradley Manning under the bus, defied the highest court in the UK, seeking assylm, why would be so concerned about one face? It makes no sence.

really .... you really have such little understanding of the whole issue ...

Who would have guessed it.

As always greeney2 .... you get your facts arse about face .....

Julian Assange has nothing to do with this report ... the report comes from various news papers & magazines from around the world.

The photo came from Anna Ardin's Facebook & twitter accounts, .... Remember i posted on this already.

Anna Ardin's a CIA rat & she is now facing criminal charges for lying to Swedish police & prosecutors.

It was Anna Ardin's own friends who rated on her lies & told the world she made it all up.

& it is because of those pending charges, ( or the fact she is a CIA agent & the USA does not want her cover blown ) That the news papers ( not assange ) the news papers blurred her face to keep her identity secret.

It is not good that Julian Assange be extradited to Sweden. It does not wait for justice without law decay. I can as European Lawyer with over 20 years of practical experience in Sweden confirm. Shortly before Anna Ardin police reported Assange of rape that would have occurred during the night from 14 to 15 August 2010 in Sweden ruined her micro-blogging on Twitter. Although the cache on her tweets have been removed by a conspiratorial hands. But some genius has yet succeeded in restoring her tweets:

August 14, she writes at. 14.00:

Julian wants to go to a crayfish party, someone who has a few seats available tonight electricity tomorrow? # fbFrom the twitter of Anna Ardin · 5 days ago · Comment

At. 02:00 on the morning of 15 Aug, ie after the alleged rape, she writes:Sunday, August 15

Sitting out here at 2am and just freeze with the world’s coolest smartest people, that’s amazing! # fb From the twitter of Anna Ardin · 5 days ago · Comment

Would you write like this if you just got raped? And why did she delete her twitter posts?

Everyone but you is fooled! I forgot, being Australian, Assange must have told you what really happened. The UK Supreme Court should have just called you Rath. Imagine how they could have gotten details so mixed up!

Contact Us.

This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. we believe this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed an interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.